Why is philosophy so hard to understand? Why don't

I feel like this is a shitpost, but I do kind of agree. It oft seems that the world of philosophy has become too esoteric and now it's just full of assholes circlejerking eachother over their "obscure references"

>>8430422
It's not something to made easy it's just that you probably struggle with certain concepts or how certain philosophers describe them

>>8430422
Blame Derrida
Seriously though most philo seems tough when you skim it but if you diagram their arguments out everything becomes comprehensible

>>8430422
If you don't start with very basic philosophical concepts then it might be hard to understand some of the more modern ones because they rely on the more basic philosophical knowledge

>>8430441
How do you "diagram their arguments"?

>>8430452
I just generally try to write them out point by point in simple terms or structure them as formal logic statements (or even problems if you know the formalism)

Makes it pretty easy

>>8430456
Could you show some of your notes?

>>8430465
Don't have them on me rn and I'm out but when I get home, sure

They often don't care if the layman can understand. Kant was explicitly unconcerned with how readable his material was. He just wanted to get his point down in the most thorough way. Also, the more contemporary you get, the more you have to know about what came before. It's all a dialogue and it can be very hard to just jump into a conversation without knowing who and what has been/is being discussed.

>>8430422
>inb4 read the greeks

origanofemalon

>>8430466
Thanks

I'm ignorant but ai figure it's basically because of two reasons: one, it's abstract and it's hard for people to picture it in their minds, two the authors need to use words with a very specific meaning, which is different from the normal one, otherwise they would need to explain the same established concepts in every work.